Except that the rules permit you to repair the damage in the case that someone steps on your line or to request relief from the committee if it cannot be repaired (Decision 16-1a/13).

You guys are missing the point (MEfree, this isn't personally aimed at you, yours was just the handiest post to quote on the topic). It's not a question of whether it usually improve your make rate, it's enough that it might help you make a putt that would otherwise not have gone in. In the situations where that happens, you have gained an advantage that has been deemed unwarranted. Thus, there's a penalty for it. It's a clear rule, it's not difficult to avoid, and it's never going to invite ambiguity in enforcement. I don't see the big issue.

I understand what you are saying and agree that it is a clear rule that is not difficult to avoid most of the time. Still, I had an incident where I broke the rule when my playing partner was slow getting over to take the stick out on a long putt where I wanted him to tend it but putted too quickly. The ambiguity here is what score do I turn in for my handicap? I enforced the penalty on myself, but some might call this sandbagging as the chances of this happening in competition are pretty remote.

It is also one more rule for everyone to remember. I knew it was a penalty, but didn`t remember if it was 1 stroke or 2, so I asked one of the guys in the pro shop who said he wasn`t sure who asked the other pro who first said 1 shot, but then corrected himself as I was leaving.

The ambiguity here is what score do I turn in for my handicap? I enforced the penalty on myself, but some might call this sandbagging as the chances of this happening in competition are pretty remote.

Yeah, this can be annoying. There are quite a few rules (e.g., the club limit) that almost seem like they should be scored separately from the handicap since they're not directly tied to how well you played. This is one that I don't worry stringently about (usually when I violate it I'm already frustrated and just putting to get the damn hole done with, so it may be irrelevant thanks to ESC :-) ) But I don't necessarily think that makes them bad rules, overall.

I understand what you are saying and agree that it is a clear rule that is not difficult to avoid most of the time. Still, I had an incident where I broke the rule when my playing partner was slow getting over to take the stick out on a long putt where I wanted him to tend it but putted too quickly. The ambiguity here is what score do I turn in for my handicap? I enforced the penalty on myself, but some might call this sandbagging as the chances of this happening in competition are pretty remote.

It is also one more rule for everyone to remember. I knew it was a penalty, but didn`t remember if it was 1 stroke or 2, so I asked one of the guys in the pro shop who said he wasn`t sure who asked the other pro who first said 1 shot, but then corrected himself as I was leaving.

By definition, you can't be sandbagging if you are playing by the rules. If you don't play by the rules, then you would likely be carrying a vanity handicap.

I understand what you are saying and agree that it is a clear rule that is not difficult to avoid most of the time. Still, I had an incident where I broke the rule when my playing partner was slow getting over to take the stick out on a long putt where I wanted him to tend it but putted too quickly. The ambiguity here is what score do I turn in for my handicap? I enforced the penalty on myself, but some might call this sandbagging as the chances of this happening in competition are pretty remote.

It is also one more rule for everyone to remember. I knew it was a penalty, but didn`t remember if it was 1 stroke or 2, so I asked one of the guys in the pro shop who said he wasn`t sure who asked the other pro who first said 1 shot, but then corrected himself as I was leaving.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

By definition, you can't be sandbagging if you are playing by the rules. If you don't play by the rules, then you would likely be carrying a vanity handicap.

It certainly is not that simple. By this definition, I could leave the flag in every time I play and just add 36 to my score at the end of the round. So I would get to enter tournaments with something in the range of a 40 handicap and you would not consider that sandbagging because I played by the rules?

I think when you play by yourself like that, you use judgement and common sense, not the letter of the rules. If you drilled that putt and think it was not going to fall, then by all means, add the penalty. But if it just fell in, and the stick didn't help it, then you should not call the penalty. If you did, I would absolutely consider it sandbagging.

It certainly is not that simple. By this definition, I could leave the flag in every time I play and just add 36 to my score at the end of the round. So I would get to enter tournaments with something in the range of a 40 handicap and you would not consider that sandbagging because I played by the rules?

I think when you play by yourself like that, you use judgement and common sense, not the letter of the rules. If you drilled that putt and think it was not going to fall, then by all means, add the penalty. But if it just fell in, and the stick didn't help it, then you should not call the penalty. If you did, I would absolutely consider it sandbagging.

Not really. Deliberate abuse of a rule is cause to invalidate a round for posting (same as if you deliberately missed a few short putts to pad your posted score), or if in a competition, could result in a DQ. It's kind of an indistinct area, but has to to do with etiquette and conduct on the course. Basically, if done deliberately, it's sandbagging. If done unintentionally during a round, then it's a legitimate score with the penalty added.

Not really. Deliberate abuse of a rule is cause to invalidate a round for posting (same as if you deliberately missed a few short putts to pad your posted score), or if in a competition, could result in a DQ. It's kind of an indistinct area, but has to to do with etiquette and conduct on the course. Basically, if done deliberately, it's sandbagging. If done unintentionally during a round, then it's a legitimate score with the penalty added.

But putting while the flagstick is still in the cup and its not being tended is pretty deliberate, don't you think?

I still think the best thing for him to do is to not count the penalty as long as he is fairly certain that it didn't affect the ball going in the hole.

Yeah, this can be annoying. There are quite a few rules (e.g., the club limit) that almost seem like they should be scored separately from the handicap since they're not directly tied to how well you played. This is one that I don't worry stringently about (usually when I violate it I'm already frustrated and just putting to get the damn hole done with, so it may be irrelevant thanks to ESC :-) ) But I don't necessarily think that makes them bad rules, overall.

I agree with this, but think it would be nice to have a set of rules that was less complex and more in line with how people play on an everyday basis. In my mind, if a rule doesn`t add to the game, then it should be eliminated, revised or simplified.

FWIW, I didn`t intentionally break the rule as I thought I either wouldn`t hit the hole (40+ foot putt with 10+ feet of break) or that one of the guys I was playing with would pull the stick in time (he was close to getting it out in time but didn`t move towards the hole until seeing that my ball had a chance to go in). I think the putt would have gone in without the help, but I would estimate that there was a 1 in 4 or 5 chance that it would not have since the late break caused it to maintain some speed and could have caused it to go from hitting center of the stick to a lip out. If it had missed the hole entirely, I think it would have been about 4 feet to the right of the cup as it was moving almost sideways when it went in.

ESC didn`t help in this case as I was on in regulation so it went in for birdie (or bogey, depending on how you look at it).

The reason I posted was because it seemed as if there was some ambiguity as to how I should score it for handicap purposes. While the rule is clear, I fully expected different people to view handicap scoring differently.

I didn`t have a bet at the time, but would guess that 95% of the people I have played with over the years would have had me play it against them as a birdie with no penalty (particularly if they were the one slow to pull the flag). Of course, in a stoke play tournament, I would have been forced to take the penalty.

But I still contend that not counting the penalty (assuming he can determine if it was going in on its own) is the right course of action and will more accurately reflect his handicap.

Yes, I think you can make a strong case for this. As I think I said earlier in the thread, I think one could also make a good case that certain types of penalty should be excluded for handicap purposes. But I am not going to hold my breath for that to happen.

For now, we just have that the handicap manual says you're supposed to play by the rules and the rules say you're supposed to pull the flag stick. If you prefer not to count the penalty for your handicap report, I think you'd be forgiven. I personally just pull the flag almost all the time, even if it's a long walk. (And, quite conveniently, I never sink long putts.)

I agree with this, but think it would be nice to have a set of rules that was less complex and more in line with how people play on an everyday basis. In my mind, if a rule doesn`t add to the game, then it should be eliminated, revised or simplified.

Define "if a rule doesn't add to the game" please.

The Rules define the game. Change the Rules and you've quite literally changed the game. What would baseball be without the Infield Fly Rule? It'd be a different version of baseball, and we might call it that, but it wouldn't be the same game as the one played before.

Plus you could simplify the Rules all you want and 90% of the people who play would ignore those too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

The reason I posted was because it seemed as if there was some ambiguity as to how I should score it for handicap purposes. While the rule is clear, I fully expected different people to view handicap scoring differently.

I didn`t have a bet at the time, but would guess that 95% of the people I have played with over the years would have had me play it against them as a birdie with no penalty (particularly if they were the one slow to pull the flag). Of course, in a stoke play tournament, I would have been forced to take the penalty.

I'd just write the score you'd have likely made. Put down a par if you think you'd have made the four-footer. The end.

For now, we just have that the handicap manual says you're supposed to play by the rules and the rules say you're supposed to pull the flag stick. If you prefer not to count the penalty for your handicap report, I think you'd be forgiven. I personally just pull the flag almost all the time, even if it's a long walk. (And, quite conveniently, I never sink long putts.)

I do sink long putts, so I simply don't putt unless the flagstick has been removed. Even when I'm playing alone, I still remove it.

The Rules define the game. Change the Rules and you've quite literally changed the game. What would baseball be without the Infield Fly Rule? It'd be a different version of baseball, and we might call it that, but it wouldn't be the same game as the one played before.

Plus you could simplify the Rules all you want and 90% of the people who play would ignore those too.

The definition of "If a rule doesn`t add to the game" likely varies from person to person, but mine would look at the following factors:

1. Does the rule (or lack of a rule) make the game more or less fun for the majority of golfers. Factors include speed of play.

2. Does the rule encourage or discourage new players from taking up the game.

3. Does the rule make it more or less likely that the best player wins. (You are probably going to ask me to define best player which I agree is hard to do and a bit of a chicken and egg situations, but I would generally say that rules that increase the chance or luck factor don`t do a good job of this while those that reduce it are better).

Do you think 90% of the people that play baseball, soccer, basketball, pool, darts, etc ignore the rules? I think the reason that so many ignore the rules in golf is that they are so different from the "rules" that most people play by.

Do you think 90% of the people that play baseball, soccer, basketball, pool, darts, etc ignore the rules? I think the reason that so many ignore the rules in golf is that they are so different from the "rules" that most people play by.

I think they might, or at least they make up their own local rules that have no basis in the "official" rules. Golf is unique in that there's essentially one set of rules that governs all the serious play everywhere.

But, even something as straightforward as Monopoly is rarely played strictly by the rules, so I don't think golfers are worse than typical when it comes to respecting the rules.

The definition of "If a rule doesn`t add to the game" likely varies from person to person, but mine would look at the following factors:

1. Does the rule (or lack of a rule) make the game more or less fun for the majority of golfers. Factors include speed of play.

2. Does the rule encourage or discourage new players from taking up the game.

3. Does the rule make it more or less likely that the best player wins. (You are probably going to ask me to define best player which I agree is hard to do and a bit of a chicken and egg situations, but I would generally say that rules that increase the chance or luck factor don`t do a good job of this while those that reduce it are better).

The problem with that definition is that you could put EVERY rule into one or more of those categories if you try hard enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

Do you think 90% of the people that play baseball, soccer, basketball, pool, darts, etc ignore the rules? I think the reason that so many ignore the rules in golf is that they are so different from the "rules" that most people play by.

Yep.

Sorry, I completely disagree with you on all of this.

If you want to write a one- or two-page Rules document be my guest. It won't be golf.

The definition of "If a rule doesn`t add to the game" likely varies from person to person, but mine would look at the following factors:

Do you think 90% of the people that play baseball, soccer, basketball, pool, darts, etc ignore the rules? I think the reason that so many ignore the rules in golf is that they are so different from the "rules" that most people play by.

Quote:

1. Does the rule (or lack of a rule) make the game more or less fun for the majority of golfers. Factors include speed of play.

Never understand this viewpoint. The only way you can possibly have fun playing golf is if you play by the rules. Otherwise you just aren't really playing golf. And playing by the rules does not preclude having fun. I play by the rules every round, whether competition, casual, with others or by myself. I wouldn't play if it wasn't fun. It also has nothing to do with pace of play. I play as fast anyone I know, yet I always play provisional balls when necessary, take proper drops, and assess penalties when I incur them.

Quote:

2. Does the rule encourage or discourage new players from taking up the game.

The rules have nothing to do with a new player's decision on taking up the game. At best they only have a sketchy idea of the rules anyway, so changing a rule or two would have absolutely no effect. 99.9% of new players play by a few basic generalities, mostly picked up by word of mouth from their buddies, not by reading a rule book.

Quote:

3. Does the rule make it more or less likely that the best player wins. (You are probably going to ask me to define best player which I agree is hard to do and a bit of a chicken and egg situations, but I would generally say that rules that increase the chance or luck factor don`t do a good job of this while those that reduce it are better).

The best player doesn't always win. The player with the lowest score wins. And it only really matters if that score was attained while playing by the Rules of Golf. If a good player breaches a lot of rules because he's ignorant or just doesn't care, he's going to lose to the weaker player who actually knows how to play a round of golf.